Tell me more ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 2 down vote favorite
1

I am new in category theory. I am trying to prove the well known fact that if you have a commutative diagram of the form □□, where each square is a pullback, then the whole diagram is a pullback too, and hence deduce that the pullback of a pullback square is a pullback. Every book I have looked at has this as an exercise, but I (embarrasingly, I know) cannot see the solution. I have tried using the universality property of the two pullbacks but i am lost in calculations. If someone could help, I would really appreciate it.

share|improve this question
See also this question. – t.b. May 30 '12 at 13:41
1  
Crossposted: mathoverflow.net/questions/98378/… – Rasmus May 30 '12 at 13:49
You might also try posting your work up to the point where you get lost in calculations; then someone might help you find your way out again. – MJD May 30 '12 at 14:18

2 Answers

up vote 10 down vote

Just for you, and it turns out my answer has to contain at least 30 characters, so let's make it 100.

share|improve this answer
A question to whoever knows these things -- is it possible to include commutative diagrams in answers here, so that the external PDF isn't necessary? – ShreevatsaR May 31 '12 at 4:24
That is a very good question. – Andrej Bauer May 31 '12 at 7:16
up vote 4 down vote

My advice: try once more. The pullback property for the big square (or rectangle) really follows from the pullback properties of the two small squares.

Hint: Start with the right hand square. Can you see two arrows as in the condition of the pullback property?

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.